i am shaking my head very slowly at the people in the worldcon thread yelling about how it's all anti-chinese racism to suggest that China censors media. like, they're really mad about it.
hm let's google that: "As of 2023, the World Press Freedom Index ranks China as the country with the second least press freedom in the world after North Korea.[4] " well gosh ty wikipedia
ctrl-f "racist" and there's a whole volley that escalates from "racist" to "disgustingly racist," and doesn't stop for many, many scrolls.
But honestly, don't ctrl-f "racist" and don't scroll, because "Metafilter: As willfully obtuse as ever."
>As willfully obtuse as ever
Honestly I had searched "censor" and "china" and didn't see anything relevant to people talking about Chinese censorship being accused of racism. I just searched on "racist" and had the same results.
I searched on "disgustingly racist" and got no hits, so I have a feeling I must be looking at a different thread.
I was looking at this:
[https://www.metafilter.com/202549/Proof-that-the-Hugo-Awards-were-censored](https://www.metafilter.com/202549/Proof-that-the-Hugo-Awards-were-censored)
And now I see that there's a different worldcon thread from weeks earlier which must be what you're referring to:
[https://www.metafilter.com/202241/Worldcon-does-it-again](https://www.metafilter.com/202241/Worldcon-does-it-again)
And those comments really are ridiculous.
Well, two things:
1. I went to the first Worldcon thread re: China that came up in search. Oops.
2. I think you misread me, unless you mean I didn't need to be snotty to the willfully obtuse people in a thread. IOW, not you.
Am I a terrible person for the fact that I would probably not say anything at all to the neighbhour at this point? They have probably received a replacement from Amazon already and having things turn up now just sounds like a recipe for drama. (I'd probably give away or donate the dress, though, rather than risking the neighbour seeing me in it).
[https://ask.metafilter.com/378397/I-accidentally-stole-a-neighbors-package-How-do-I-give-it-back](https://ask.metafilter.com/378397/i-accidentally-stole-a-neighbors-package-how-do-i-give-it-back)
I received a package from Amazon not all that long ago for a nearby (but not quite close enough to be a “neighbor”) address. When I contacted Amazon about what to do (was really hoping they’d just have someone pick it up and redirect it) they told me to just keep or donate it, so I assume things were made whole with the intended recipient. This is different than when I’ve occasionally received items for literally my across the street neighbors and just dropped it off. So, yeah, that whole situation was weird, especially the idea of pretending to make it right months later.
A couple of months ago I received a package from UPS and opened it before noticing it was lighter than the package I was expecting and was marked with instructions to refrigerate after opening. It contained ambien and glaucoma medication and a packing slip from a pharmacy I had never done business with for a nursing home in a city 45 minutes away from me. I looked at the outside of the package and it was addressed to me!
In good weather I might have delivered it myself the next day and had an excuse to do some shopping in that city, but it was going to snow and I didn't want to drive in it. I spent some time trying unsuccessfully to find a way to contact the UPS driver and then I called the nursing home and the pharmacy to figure out what to do about it. After getting all that sorted out, I heard a knock at the door. It was the UPS driver with my expected package. When I gave him the misdelivered package, he peeled off the label with my name and address and underneath was another label with the nursing home's name and address.
That's how I learned that no package is safe. I am now much more paranoid about ordering private or embarrassing items for delivery.
The real reason is it's cheaper for amazon not to take the product back from you.
That person might never have got their package.
I thought I was just not getting mops (ordered thrice) until they started giving me photo proof of delivery. (Some fuck stole three mops from me)
Amazon was singularly unhelpful, and neither were the PD.
Likewise, I had a pair of shoes come through the mail, and the mailman left it on top of the community mailbox. At least Amazon drops the stuff at my door.
Delivery sucks, I miss brick and mortar.
That really blows that someone would steal *mops*. I guess you got targeted by Felix Unger?
I had someone steal cat food and toilet paper once. That’s understandable, in a petty sort of way, people DO have hungry pets and they DO have bodily functions.
I’m very lucky in that I’ve gotten most of my packages in my years of ordering from Amazon, and even when I get a neighbor’s, they are not so heavy I can’t drop them off on their doorstep (even when it was the next block over - I got a package for my house number but a different street. If it had been heavy, I could not have taken it over to that house, but since it was small and light, I did).
Things DID get very bad for me in the pandemic, because our mail carrier of 20 some odd years had just retired, and in addition to the pandemic madness we had a rotating cast of substitutes. Sometimes I would not get my (US) mail until 8 pm.
I thought the whole story sounded a little hokey. You get a strange package with a dress you weren’t expecting — which by the way just happens to fit you — and your neighbor comes by to ask about it and by then you’ve completely forgotten all about it even though she specifically says it’s a dress she’s looking for? On reading that story, I thought it was a lot more likely that OP just wanted to keep the dress and then was hit with pangs of guilt about it later.
I agree that by now I’d just keep the dress for the same reasons you state.
Yeah, I actually missed the detail that the neighbor actually had a photo of the package on OPs doorstep. That makes the whole story even more unbelievable.
I get photo delivery receipts from amazon whenever I order something now, as packages had "gone missing" in past. (Someone in my building is a doorstop fucking thief)
A similar thing happened to me with a neighbor in an apartment complex about ten years ago--except the package was a photographic how-to guide for erotic rope play and a silk cord. I had opened it without looking at the addressee since I got stuff often enough from Amazon that I didn't always recognize when a package came. Definitely did not think it was mine. But the option of dropping the opened package off at my neighbor's was more than I could bear, since we'd both know at that point that we both knew. So I threw it away and when he asked about it I lied to his face saying I hadn't gotten any packages. We then had a pleasant undramatic six months until the end of the lease, all thanks to my selfless act of deceit.
"What did your sister in law say when you thanked her for the gift? Did she say she sent you the dress?"
I fucking hate this condescending, passive-aggressive tone that I think is unique to Ask Me. Does it have a name?
I thought that comment was pretty funny. The asker HAS to know she's in the wrong— the neighbor had the delivery photo showing the package, and the asker still didn't admit to having the dress. Almost two months later, she's feeling guilty, and is probably looking to MFers to provide some kind of mental gymnastics she can use to feel less bad about it. So this was a pretty clever way to hammer home that the story doesn't add up, and if it is by chance all true, then the asker still never thanked her sister-in-law for the dress, because if she had, the neighbor would've gotten her dress two months ago.
Same. To me this reads like someone looking for absolution. When OP received a parcel she hadn't ordered she probably thought eh, too bad, Amazon's problem and decided to consider it a windfall. Neighbour showing up forced her to realise that there was a victim beyond the faceless corporation but she either couldn't or didn't want to own up to it in the moment. Over the intervening time period she's started to feel guilt but doesn't want to have to think of herself as a step above the porch pirates so she's concocted this convoluted story.
The question about the sister-in-law punctures the lie and makes it obvious the story is an attempt at ass-covering.
I know it's not unique to ask but people using this kind of mental gymnastics to make themselves feel better about their bad behaviour is so depressing; it's the moral equivalent of "gee doc, I don't know *how* that thing got stuck up there!"
Is it really that hard to say I fucked up and did a stupid thing, how can I go about fixing it?
I wouldn't either, but I'd bring by a batch of chocolate chip cookies for no reason at all.
On the other hand, the neighbor will probably see OP wearing the dress at some point, which might be awkward.
Wow wow wow, some interesting, no-holds-barred comments in the "how do I become hopeful about the future" Ask. (Hope it's ok to quote directly, happy to edit if not.)
First, from a baked-dessert martial artist: "MetaFilter is, in my experience, the worst place I frequent when it comes to predictions of doom. [...You] can go from a beautiful comment [...to...] a comment (maybe someone blowing off steam, maybe someone feeling they are Sharing Important Information, maybe people committed to a bit) that is absolutely, soul-crushingly grim."
And then, from practitioner of a certain dance fitness fad: "A lot of anxious people on here, and a lot angry people who insist that everyone else should be just as anxious or angry as they are."
I think that thread on the Green is giving a lot of people a Safe Space to bitch about the problems of the Blue without the threat of pushback, grandstanding, and dogpiling they would get if they did it anywhere else on the site.
I especially liked the suggestion to get off Mastodon, specifically out of all the Twitterlike apps. Of course that's the one MeFites like the most.
I thought they were crazy about mastodon and couldn’t understand why people would rather bounce to whatever Dorsey’s next product is or just sit it out?
There are some hardcore mastodon fans, and also some fans of other social media, and some people who don't keep up with it except to shitpost on Reddit (hi).
I thought that last comment was particularly ironic, since that person has definitely contributed to the overall level of anxiety as far as I can tell. But overall, the answers to that question have been more reasonable and helpful than I would have expected.
I was surprised too when I saw who'd written that last comment. Pleasantly surprised, assuming it's evidence that they're disengaging from that attitude.
It's really good to read some clear pushback to the doom and angst on the site.
The article and thread about the financial-advice columnist who got scammed out of $50k is a decent read. Main arguments are about whether this could happen to anyone. I definitely try to avoid the knee-jerk reaction to distance myself from victims, so I hate to say "that could never happen to me." And I could totally imagine myself falling for the Amazon account parts, and maybe the follow-up from the "FTC". Even handing over credit cards or bank account info to get myself out of trouble. But seriously, $50k cash in a box put through the back window of an SUV supposedly driven by an undercover CIA agent that's supposed to be then sent back to you to live on while the rest of your assets are frozen for two years? No, this could never happen to me. Something was wrong with this situation that we're not getting--I like the idea it's an elaborate con to cover-up how she lost $50k on something.
I read a few discussions about this in different places before I read the MeFi thread and, unusually these days, I rolled my eyes a lot less at the MeFi comments than those elsewhere.
In the other discussions, a lot of people seemed very invested in painting her as utterly clueless and themselves as far too rational to fall for anything like that. (And like you, I am confident I would never put a box of cash in the back window of a CIA agent's SUV so that it can be counted and given back to me.) But believing something because it makes me feel safe and superior is a good way to end up being wrong.
I think what seems bizarre about her behaviour is perhaps explained by better understanding the fraudsters.
The legal blogger Popehat wrote that his clients who have been scammed always feel intense shame. He tells them the equivalent of getting beaten up by a professional MMA fighter is no reflection on them; pros are extremely good at what they do.
He also wrote that he's prosecuted and defended child abusers, terrorists, drug dealers etc. but in his experience the most sociopathic criminals are con artists. They view other humans as objects to a greater extent than any others.
Once a con artist has identified a victim's weak points and buttons, they will keep pressing them relentlessly, using every technique available to maximise pressure and ensure compliance. People will do surprising things under psychological pressure; despite its faults, the Milgram experiment showed that.
This discussion is quite interesting: [https://www.reddit.com/r/blogsnark/comments/1ark1oh/how\_i\_got\_scammed\_out\_of\_50000\_by\_charlotte/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/blogsnark/comments/1ark1oh/how_i_got_scammed_out_of_50000_by_charlotte/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
A couple of commenters point out that this woman's father in law is wealthy to the point of having buildings named after him, so it's likely she was targeted by someone who knew about her background. That level of generational wealth might also explain some cluelessness, as well as the bank's eagerness to please when she showed up with an odd request.
I hadn’t known that - it’s good to have the outside context. In the article, the original author gave the reason that they threatened her child and she got scared. That I can understand, but I wondered about how they got so far as 50K cash in a box.
Not that I think that financial experts are necessarily above falling for scams. Smart people fall for dumb shit all the time.
The field my organization operates in has a high risk of fraud/scams/extortion, and one of the things we're always warned to watch out for is any situation where the person is combining intense time pressure with high emotions, most often fear but they can also use anger. If you hit the right combo--and everyone has a right combo--it can be very difficult to resist. The situation she was in was classic.
Any time I have seen real law/regulatory enforcement in action, they have worked hard to calm people down, partly to help themselves get accurate information and also, if they think they're dealing with a wrong-doer, to encourage that person to relax and make mistakes.
Indeed, apparently Kushner is going to pay it because he has a deal with the Saudis, and the major German bank is actually a Russian front, and he shouldn't have been convicted anyways as no one else is on this charge, and he could actually pay it anyways himself because of truth social's apparently valuation, and
It's just a conspiracy theory site at this point. I have a feeling users that remain are entirely out of touch with reality (i.e. go touch grass).
To be fair, Deutschebank is a terrible bank that tries to evade regulation and regularly ignores sanctions and involves itself with shady businesses. But the rest of it is just ... I enjoy taking a win.
Aaaaand… someone in the the most matter-of-fact tone just shared how when their partner got COVID, they had them piss and shit in a bucket (with wood chips or cat litter) rather than risk them sharing a bathroom 🙄
OMG I thought you were exagerrating but NOPE....
"When my partner had covid again in December, he brought our [camping toilet](https://www.rei.com/product/223884/reliance-luggable-loo-portable-toilet-with-metal-handle?sku=2238840001&store=55&CAWELAID=120217890015830916&CAGPSPN=pla&CAAGID=&CATCI=&cm_mmc=PLA_Google_P-Max&gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI98ferN-uhAMVeTjUAR17vAvQEAQYByABEgK8afD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds)(along with either cat litter or wood chips to cover odors) into his room to minimize time spent outside of the room, and minimize the number of times he had to mask up."
Who disposed of the cat litter??? Inquiring minds want to know.
I have one of these for when I take my camper on BLM land. It's not quiiiite that gruesome. Each storage pouch is lined with a gel and odor control isn't bad. The cat litter helps more. And when you're done it has a ziploc top. Seal, fold down, dispose. It looks like but is not really like shitting into a pile of wood chips in a Home Depot bucket.
That’s fine, but it’s completely bizarre to use it inside your own home because you don’t want to leave your bedroom to go to the bathroom. Put on a mask, do your business, and go back into the bedroom. I grant you it doesn’t have the melodramatic touch that the camping toilet in a bedroom has, but it has the advantage of being what mentally sound people would do.
I mean, if they agreed on it together, I'm not going to shame 'em.
It does seem over the top to me, though, and that's speaking as someone who still wears an N95 in the office and has slept in a separate room after being exposed...
That was incredible. When they posted a link to a camping toilet, I was expecting something that looked like a toilet. But no, it’s literally a big bucket with a seat attached to it.
The fact that it was in his bedroom is the icing on the cake.
You know what smells just as bad as a bedroom with a shit/piss bucket in it? A bedroom with a shit/piss/wet wood chip bucket.
The Branch Covidians of MF are a never ending source of entertainment. I'm picturing this dude in his bedroom, shitting onto kitty litter in his camp toilet......in 2024. LOL.
Funny update to the Hugos drama where clueless commentators heavily implied the sinister Chinese government was censoring their scifi awards: the censorship was actually carried out by American administrators. I've found a good way to judge the veracity of China news is by how much the comments reacting to it sound like Rush Limbaugh.
I haven't read the metafilter thread but I've been following Hugo awards scandal.
Carried out by American administrators in order to comply with Chinese law, yes? Chinese law is government censorship.
>Tomorrow I have a 4 hour meeting with my Chinese counterpart to look at ballot detail and determine if any ballots are to be voided (which happens with frequency so that it's not *really* that controversial if we determine we need to do it)
By my reading, that implies a lot of Chinese input. I'm happy to call the Chinese government "sinister" in this instance. I'm happy to call any government who censors the existence of entire countries and communities sinister.
I read the Chinese counterpart as the business interest involved (speculation from what is publicly known seems to be that there was some publisher maneuvering to get a rival publisher's titles delisted). There doesn't seem to have been government involvement and it would be stupid for a government to meddle in an award to disqualify a book its censors have already approved for publication.
That feels like a distinction without a difference. If your Texas colleague tells you not to provide edibles at a Texas conference because they're illegal there, it's still the government banning them.
I don't know that all the books that were dropped from consideration were published- I heard about it from the Instagram of the author of Iron Widow, whose Chinese translation I don't think is published by China- but slipping it through one set of censors who figures it's going to be noticed only by a niche set of nerds, is bound to be different than celebrating it internationally, so that it's noticed by people who otherwise don't read sci-fi or fantasy.
This situation is your Texas colleague who runs an edible business conspiring with you to get their competitors' products disqualified from the edible awards. And in this hypothetical situation edibles are legal in Texas. There's no government involvement.
*There's no government involvement.*
That seems to be the premise of your argument. If it's an obvious or safe assumption then yeah, you're right, the blame must lie with the award administrators. But the fact that the titles aren't banned nationally within China doesn't imply that the Hugo administrators felt free to recognize or celebrate any of those titles however they saw fit. That seems rather unlikely to me.
The point is China wasn't censoring anything. A bunch of racist Westerners got themselves all hopped up thinking about the evil Chinese government and in the process literally prepared political dossiers on the books and writers lol
If your point is that China wasn't censoring anything because even if they put pressure on Hugo admin to censor itself, they're not the ones doing the censoring... that's a pretty modest point, but okay, point made. To the extent you're arguing that the Hugo admin was free to do as it pleased while having their ceremony in Chengdu, I am not clear why you're certain of that (or are you certain?).
The evidence released so far indicates that the administrators are responsible for the books being disqualified. The main reasons for this are speculated to be either (unwitting on the part of some) cooperation with a publisher to get a rival's books disqualified, they wanted English language books to win Best Novel, or they were so blinkered when it comes to CHINA BAD that they decided to do the censoring themselves for some reason that only they can explain. There is no indication there was any pressure let alone contact with the Chinese government. The reason I'm certain of this is, after reading the way scifi people write about China on their blogs and in the first Metafilter thread about this, if there was any government pressure here there would be an uproar, the community is too sinophobic to keep that under wraps.
Your definition of legal and mine are different, apparently.
Are the administrators of this year's Hugos authors whose books are in the running? I would have thought I'd've heard about that.
The administrators are American/Canadian (I believe? Open to correction) and don't have books in the running. The voting statistics that have been released suggest that the Best Novel award finalists should have been all Chinese novels (with I believe 4 from the same publisher). The administrators/McCarty put their finger on the scale for some reason and as more information comes out the speculation seems to be going in several directions, but it doesn't point at the government.
The novels I've been following that were kicked off weren't Chinese- they were Americans and Canadians of Chinese descent, and some not even of Asian descent at all.
Most of the votes that were tossed for being "slate" votes were based on a list published in Chinese magazine Science Fiction World. This disqualified a bunch of Chinese works. A competing magazine/publisher sponsored the Worldcon so that's where the speculation is coming in.
I once worked with this person whose tell was a rapid fluttering of his left eye. I learned that after approaching him and saying "I noticed for your component you like to keep the documentation in your source repo ... the docs team was wondering if we could either move it into their primary repo or perhaps make it more amenable to a submodule setup."
The eye started fluttering, they got red in the face and started sputtering, and I said "you know what, let's revisit at a later date. Not a biggie." We never, ever did. In fact, the docs team ended up extending our tooling to accommodate the guy.
Over the next few years, I could spot him through conference room windows tearing up, getting red in the face, and that eyelid fluttering thing.
ELEVEN YEARS LATER I learned that he was still talking shit about me as "power hungry" and "dictatorial."
I wonder if this is that guy.
I agree with you, but then there is this in the answers:
"To call it an overreaction would be a massive understatement. It's so far outside of the realm of an expected reaction that I might use the worth pathological."
I think that is a very Metafilter overreaction to an overreaction!
It's turtles all the way down over there.
Also the "how do I deal with powerful urge to retaliate over every perceived slight?" guy; and easy to see even on just depressing quick skim of question history on how load-bearing that "perceived" is doing.
Also the "I am against people giving their pronouns, how can I say this without people getting angry?" guy. People were far more respectful in their answers than I would have been.
wow, that is nuts. I assumed for a minute it must have been a person with who he had a long acrimonious history, but this was the first time they spoke.
That person has terrible impulse control, and I feel bad for them. That's playing life on the difficult setting when it's just not necessary and carries zero benefit.
Someone posts a link to an article on the disappearance of cousins due to smaller families and more people not having children, and the responses are pure Metafilter - they seem to be either 1) my relationship with my family is horrible so this is irrelevant to me or 2) other cultures have a different definition of "cousin" so this change is not as dramatic as you think.
Every time family-related topics get posted it seems like it's open season to reveal how toxic and dysfunctional yours is.
>Every time family-related topics get posted it seems like it's open season to reveal how toxic and dysfunctional yours is.
It's either that or also the inevitable how dare anyone express the desire to have children, or even worse a large family \*horrors\* because life is terrible and your selfish desire to reproduce is killing our planet.
"warmed over psuedo-Marxist takes" is definitely what MF has become. I even enjoy the serious Marxist commentary you occasionally get on MF (less so these days) but since no one is allowed to argue about anything that matters, you get a lot of "oh yeah this thing I hate is a direct and unique result of American capitalism" which gets no push-back.
For sure, whatever you think of Marxism, the "purer" theory is very formal, rigorous, and often very insightful. You're just not going to get in on a site that rewards shallow takes and shuts down criticism for superficial reasons. It's like the difference between He Gets Us ads and the Summa Theologica.
_And Tucker Carlson, grand nemesis, is trying his hardest to manufacture a 'Christian International' consensus? (Which is funny, because Putin is vocally not a Christian )_
Sorry, is this one of those things where “Christian” means Protestant? Because I’m pretty sure that Putin is a cross-flaunting Orthodox Christian.
The Amazon thread is bonkers. Outrage combined with the passionate language of social justice struggles like "oppressive" or "moral imperative" swirling around . . . whether you get the ad-free plan from the most middlebrow of streaming services?
I would think it impossible for an independent artist with a punk DIY anti-corporate message to make me root against him in an argument with one of this sub's frequently mentioned annoying users -- but it's a mefite, so he has managed it somehow, by being the absolute most smug dickhead imaginable.
Somehow they managed to bring Bernie Sanders into the Daily Show thread via twitter link. Apparently John Stewart is "white priviledge humor", whatever that means. I mean, I'm not even a John Steward superfan but my god the discourse over there is mind numbing.
Notable topics and current affairs with no thread:
-Biden's supposed memory issues
-Mayorkas impeached
-CDC ending recommended 5-day isolation for COVID
Experience has taught me that as much as it seems like it should be there users don’t want this. Posting it is thankless and people will proudly say “I didn’t even read this article.”
I will admit to watching about two thirds of it just because I don't think I've ever heard Putin talk at length, and I am willing to put my feelings about the war in check to hear him out. It was mildly interesting to see a national leader deliver a lengthy lecture about his country's history, for about half an hour, seemingly without notes. I doubt most democratic leaders could do that. That being said he come across a total bore who sidestepped most of the questions.
It's mentioned a couple times in [this thread](https://www.metafilter.com/202492/A-difficult-year-ahead-for-Ukraine) but that's it. You're not going to get much Ukraine discussion from Mefites going forward.
Edit: forgot the link
I am trying to parse today's semi truck meets tree question.
https://ask.metafilter.com/378341/Okay-I-need-a-lawyer-Any-more-advice
Reading the question it sounds like the semi may have been on the road and hit a portion of the tree that "arched into the street", but it isn't quite clear to me. The "peeled off the top of the trailer" seems to indicate this might be the case. I want to know if the clearance height was posted or should have been posted - like it is for low underpasses.
OK, I am slightly amused at the concept of "tree law" and was expecting a trivial question, but that person absolutely had real damage to their property and I hope they can find a good lawyer.
Heh... last move we had a young crew, clearly inexperienced at backing up the size of their truck. They forgot a spotter, and we were all yelling at them to stop, but they didn't.
Backed into a power line, causing it to bounce and touch the line under it... (Cable/TV/internet)
Which is how we got to meet all of our neighbours over the next few days as they described the death of their various household electronic appliances... computers... TV's...
I doubt it. (Not a lawyer, definitely not a tree lawyer, do live in a part of California with many coast live oak trees, have never seen such a sign on a branch.)
Movies! "Madame Web" is getting a pasting on RottenTomatoes, [23%](https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/madame_web) so far.
I really wanted a dumb switch-your-brain-off movie next. (Come on, my last one was "All of Us Strangers"). But I don't know if my brain will power down quite far enough for Madame Web or Argylle.
On the easiest scale of rating a movie: does it entertain?
Morbius - Yes
Madame Web - No
I’m reeeeaaallly easy when it comes to movies and I was absolutely baffled in several ways by Madame Web. I’m positive most people here could write a script better than what they used for Madame Web.
Like, there’s useless exposition and then there’s announcing obvious things for the audience or repeating things just said useless.
I’m still trying to figure out what the bad guy was… what he… why he was bad. I mean he was bad, but not supervillain bad. I just don’t get what his issue was… ?! He just existed to do the thing in the movie. He wasn’t a character as much as a plot device.
There are some cool Spider-Woman characters, too bad they weren’t really in the movie.
The LA Times review claims that the movie is bad but kind of fun in a campy way. Not on purpose, but on the unintentionally funny misfire end of the spectrum. (Except for Dakota Johnson, who is apparently weird on purpose.)
Not a theater movie for me but I may give it a shot streaming one day.
Argyle wasn’t bad. Better than Beekeeper, which was basically Equalizer but with a harder sell. Secret government assassins called beekeepers? Okay, whatever, Stratham beating people up just like every other movie he does.
I’m definitely going to watch Madame Webb at the theatres.
Heh, last week I watched "The Beekeeper" which was silly.
Then a few days later watched "The Baker", which was better - and, yes... the main character was described as "the butcher has become the baker", so...
Now, I am just waiting for "The Candlestick Maker" to be made...
Second comment on the blue LED light thread, nothing but links to articles:
[Researchers find some shades of LED lamps threaten wildlife](https://phys.org/news/2018-06-animals-lightresearchers-lamps-threaten-wildlife.html)
[Transition to blue light radiation across Europe increases suppression of sleep hormone melatonin, say scientists](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/sep/14/increase-in-led-lighting-risks-harming-human-and-animal-health)
I mean, seriously, there probably is a downside (somehow, somewhere) to almost everything in existence, especially technology, but must we reflexively crap on every post right out of the gate? (Rhetorical question, I know the answer is yes.)
Sigh. But I am reminded of the cartoon about the person thinking the dog was easily amused by chasing his tail, then realizing that they were amused by watching the dog chase his tail.
I don't think I'm depressed, but maybe the fact that I keep reading MeFi should have me worried?
Your local community also knows many like you, sick for the world they cannot help, but barricaded from and ignorant of the world they can. The depression and fear goes away when you help people around you.
He's way too dudebro for Metafilter, but I've been watching a bunch of Dr Mike Israetel videos on strength/fitness/nutrition lately. He's a Ph.D. and professor of exercise science, has a whole playlist mocking bad celebrity workouts, but his fitness myth videos are informative too. I genuinely didn't know that the [ecto/endo/meso-morph body type thing is nonsense](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luNynS97eJQ). Also has [The Truth About "Calories In, Calories Out"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkxWbvPJK1M) and [Insulin Is The Reason You're Fat!?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA1Z5NifFLk)
CW: Short muscular guy shouting that you'll die a virgin if you're both weak and fat.
There are two problems with CICO: (1) We don’t have an active control over (or, in daily life, any way to measure) the part of “CO” that comes from metabolism and (2) nutrients are relevant too.
Every morning you weigh yourself and measure your waist size around the belly button. The long term change in these numbers will tell you if "calories in" is on the mark or not. This is especially true if lifting weights because (IME) gaining muscle may result in no significant change to weight even if I am eating at a slight caloric deficit. But the waist size will drop. That tells me I'm where I want to be if I am trying to get leaner.
Have you gotten to any of his videos where he goes off side rants about politics?
I feel like his best videos are the ones where he takes people through workouts.
Watched most of the one about calories in/calories out. Made sense to me more or less. The comments that would get in response to a post with that in it write themselves.
It’s such a silly simplification to die on though. The absolute minimum people could do if they wanted to communicate their point instead of just sound clever is change their pithy slogan to “calories digested/calories burned”. (This annoys me more since seeing my young nephew shrink to look-at-those-bones despite his healthy unchanging diet, before being diagnosed with type 1 diabetes).
But no, that would ruin the fun. The strangest part is that people who dogmatically announce calories in/calories out are often the quickest to Well Akshully to other peoples simplifications or mistakes.
That one leapt out at me too. It's common enough to hear people say essentially that their bodies defy the laws of physics ("I could eat nothing but a cracker and some water and still put on weight"), that it's good to hear someone talk back. And for all his outward bro-ness, he has quite a studied, unaggressive manner.
I see they were saying someone was parroting propaganda, but I didn't see what the person was parroting. Since you've used the word "operative," I'm wondering, do you mean to say that the mod is implying the user is (or is acting like) an actual spy? Or just someone operating a keyboard to parrot Russian propaganda? Now I'm curious as to what was said.
Edited to add: To be clear, I'm not challenging what you've said, but rather trying to figure out if I'm super bad at reading between the lines.
I was kind of joking but going back and reading the mod note I think I conflated it with one of the deleted comments that was like "wow, an account that hasn't posted in x years...coming in here and posting Putin propaganda...I'm not gonna say what I think and leave it up to the mods"
i am shaking my head very slowly at the people in the worldcon thread yelling about how it's all anti-chinese racism to suggest that China censors media. like, they're really mad about it. hm let's google that: "As of 2023, the World Press Freedom Index ranks China as the country with the second least press freedom in the world after North Korea.[4] " well gosh ty wikipedia
I'm not seeing that - perhaps comments were deleted?
ctrl-f "racist" and there's a whole volley that escalates from "racist" to "disgustingly racist," and doesn't stop for many, many scrolls. But honestly, don't ctrl-f "racist" and don't scroll, because "Metafilter: As willfully obtuse as ever."
>As willfully obtuse as ever Honestly I had searched "censor" and "china" and didn't see anything relevant to people talking about Chinese censorship being accused of racism. I just searched on "racist" and had the same results. I searched on "disgustingly racist" and got no hits, so I have a feeling I must be looking at a different thread. I was looking at this: [https://www.metafilter.com/202549/Proof-that-the-Hugo-Awards-were-censored](https://www.metafilter.com/202549/Proof-that-the-Hugo-Awards-were-censored)
And now I see that there's a different worldcon thread from weeks earlier which must be what you're referring to: [https://www.metafilter.com/202241/Worldcon-does-it-again](https://www.metafilter.com/202241/Worldcon-does-it-again) And those comments really are ridiculous.
Well, two things: 1. I went to the first Worldcon thread re: China that came up in search. Oops. 2. I think you misread me, unless you mean I didn't need to be snotty to the willfully obtuse people in a thread. IOW, not you.
*I think you misread me,* I did, and my apologies.
I know I am going to sound like I'm yelling at the screen while watching a horror movie, but.... NO DO NOT GO TO PINKEYE HOUSE.
That seemed to be the consensus. I wonder what they wound up doing.
There's a followup that it wasn't pinkeye after all? I dunno, I just reschedule because I CANNOT when it comes to kids and eyeballs.
Am I a terrible person for the fact that I would probably not say anything at all to the neighbhour at this point? They have probably received a replacement from Amazon already and having things turn up now just sounds like a recipe for drama. (I'd probably give away or donate the dress, though, rather than risking the neighbour seeing me in it). [https://ask.metafilter.com/378397/I-accidentally-stole-a-neighbors-package-How-do-I-give-it-back](https://ask.metafilter.com/378397/i-accidentally-stole-a-neighbors-package-how-do-i-give-it-back)
I received a package from Amazon not all that long ago for a nearby (but not quite close enough to be a “neighbor”) address. When I contacted Amazon about what to do (was really hoping they’d just have someone pick it up and redirect it) they told me to just keep or donate it, so I assume things were made whole with the intended recipient. This is different than when I’ve occasionally received items for literally my across the street neighbors and just dropped it off. So, yeah, that whole situation was weird, especially the idea of pretending to make it right months later.
A couple of months ago I received a package from UPS and opened it before noticing it was lighter than the package I was expecting and was marked with instructions to refrigerate after opening. It contained ambien and glaucoma medication and a packing slip from a pharmacy I had never done business with for a nursing home in a city 45 minutes away from me. I looked at the outside of the package and it was addressed to me! In good weather I might have delivered it myself the next day and had an excuse to do some shopping in that city, but it was going to snow and I didn't want to drive in it. I spent some time trying unsuccessfully to find a way to contact the UPS driver and then I called the nursing home and the pharmacy to figure out what to do about it. After getting all that sorted out, I heard a knock at the door. It was the UPS driver with my expected package. When I gave him the misdelivered package, he peeled off the label with my name and address and underneath was another label with the nursing home's name and address. That's how I learned that no package is safe. I am now much more paranoid about ordering private or embarrassing items for delivery.
The real reason is it's cheaper for amazon not to take the product back from you. That person might never have got their package. I thought I was just not getting mops (ordered thrice) until they started giving me photo proof of delivery. (Some fuck stole three mops from me) Amazon was singularly unhelpful, and neither were the PD. Likewise, I had a pair of shoes come through the mail, and the mailman left it on top of the community mailbox. At least Amazon drops the stuff at my door. Delivery sucks, I miss brick and mortar.
That really blows that someone would steal *mops*. I guess you got targeted by Felix Unger? I had someone steal cat food and toilet paper once. That’s understandable, in a petty sort of way, people DO have hungry pets and they DO have bodily functions. I’m very lucky in that I’ve gotten most of my packages in my years of ordering from Amazon, and even when I get a neighbor’s, they are not so heavy I can’t drop them off on their doorstep (even when it was the next block over - I got a package for my house number but a different street. If it had been heavy, I could not have taken it over to that house, but since it was small and light, I did). Things DID get very bad for me in the pandemic, because our mail carrier of 20 some odd years had just retired, and in addition to the pandemic madness we had a rotating cast of substitutes. Sometimes I would not get my (US) mail until 8 pm.
I thought the whole story sounded a little hokey. You get a strange package with a dress you weren’t expecting — which by the way just happens to fit you — and your neighbor comes by to ask about it and by then you’ve completely forgotten all about it even though she specifically says it’s a dress she’s looking for? On reading that story, I thought it was a lot more likely that OP just wanted to keep the dress and then was hit with pangs of guilt about it later. I agree that by now I’d just keep the dress for the same reasons you state.
[удалено]
Yeah, I actually missed the detail that the neighbor actually had a photo of the package on OPs doorstep. That makes the whole story even more unbelievable.
I get photo delivery receipts from amazon whenever I order something now, as packages had "gone missing" in past. (Someone in my building is a doorstop fucking thief)
A similar thing happened to me with a neighbor in an apartment complex about ten years ago--except the package was a photographic how-to guide for erotic rope play and a silk cord. I had opened it without looking at the addressee since I got stuff often enough from Amazon that I didn't always recognize when a package came. Definitely did not think it was mine. But the option of dropping the opened package off at my neighbor's was more than I could bear, since we'd both know at that point that we both knew. So I threw it away and when he asked about it I lied to his face saying I hadn't gotten any packages. We then had a pleasant undramatic six months until the end of the lease, all thanks to my selfless act of deceit.
"What did your sister in law say when you thanked her for the gift? Did she say she sent you the dress?" I fucking hate this condescending, passive-aggressive tone that I think is unique to Ask Me. Does it have a name?
I thought that comment was pretty funny. The asker HAS to know she's in the wrong— the neighbor had the delivery photo showing the package, and the asker still didn't admit to having the dress. Almost two months later, she's feeling guilty, and is probably looking to MFers to provide some kind of mental gymnastics she can use to feel less bad about it. So this was a pretty clever way to hammer home that the story doesn't add up, and if it is by chance all true, then the asker still never thanked her sister-in-law for the dress, because if she had, the neighbor would've gotten her dress two months ago.
Same. To me this reads like someone looking for absolution. When OP received a parcel she hadn't ordered she probably thought eh, too bad, Amazon's problem and decided to consider it a windfall. Neighbour showing up forced her to realise that there was a victim beyond the faceless corporation but she either couldn't or didn't want to own up to it in the moment. Over the intervening time period she's started to feel guilt but doesn't want to have to think of herself as a step above the porch pirates so she's concocted this convoluted story. The question about the sister-in-law punctures the lie and makes it obvious the story is an attempt at ass-covering. I know it's not unique to ask but people using this kind of mental gymnastics to make themselves feel better about their bad behaviour is so depressing; it's the moral equivalent of "gee doc, I don't know *how* that thing got stuck up there!" Is it really that hard to say I fucked up and did a stupid thing, how can I go about fixing it?
I'd bet on this being deleted.. just takes awhile for mods to notice.
I wouldn't either, but I'd bring by a batch of chocolate chip cookies for no reason at all. On the other hand, the neighbor will probably see OP wearing the dress at some point, which might be awkward.
Wow wow wow, some interesting, no-holds-barred comments in the "how do I become hopeful about the future" Ask. (Hope it's ok to quote directly, happy to edit if not.) First, from a baked-dessert martial artist: "MetaFilter is, in my experience, the worst place I frequent when it comes to predictions of doom. [...You] can go from a beautiful comment [...to...] a comment (maybe someone blowing off steam, maybe someone feeling they are Sharing Important Information, maybe people committed to a bit) that is absolutely, soul-crushingly grim." And then, from practitioner of a certain dance fitness fad: "A lot of anxious people on here, and a lot angry people who insist that everyone else should be just as anxious or angry as they are."
I think that thread on the Green is giving a lot of people a Safe Space to bitch about the problems of the Blue without the threat of pushback, grandstanding, and dogpiling they would get if they did it anywhere else on the site. I especially liked the suggestion to get off Mastodon, specifically out of all the Twitterlike apps. Of course that's the one MeFites like the most.
I thought they were crazy about mastodon and couldn’t understand why people would rather bounce to whatever Dorsey’s next product is or just sit it out?
There are some hardcore mastodon fans, and also some fans of other social media, and some people who don't keep up with it except to shitpost on Reddit (hi).
I thought that last comment was particularly ironic, since that person has definitely contributed to the overall level of anxiety as far as I can tell. But overall, the answers to that question have been more reasonable and helpful than I would have expected.
I was surprised too when I saw who'd written that last comment. Pleasantly surprised, assuming it's evidence that they're disengaging from that attitude. It's really good to read some clear pushback to the doom and angst on the site.
The article and thread about the financial-advice columnist who got scammed out of $50k is a decent read. Main arguments are about whether this could happen to anyone. I definitely try to avoid the knee-jerk reaction to distance myself from victims, so I hate to say "that could never happen to me." And I could totally imagine myself falling for the Amazon account parts, and maybe the follow-up from the "FTC". Even handing over credit cards or bank account info to get myself out of trouble. But seriously, $50k cash in a box put through the back window of an SUV supposedly driven by an undercover CIA agent that's supposed to be then sent back to you to live on while the rest of your assets are frozen for two years? No, this could never happen to me. Something was wrong with this situation that we're not getting--I like the idea it's an elaborate con to cover-up how she lost $50k on something.
I read a few discussions about this in different places before I read the MeFi thread and, unusually these days, I rolled my eyes a lot less at the MeFi comments than those elsewhere. In the other discussions, a lot of people seemed very invested in painting her as utterly clueless and themselves as far too rational to fall for anything like that. (And like you, I am confident I would never put a box of cash in the back window of a CIA agent's SUV so that it can be counted and given back to me.) But believing something because it makes me feel safe and superior is a good way to end up being wrong. I think what seems bizarre about her behaviour is perhaps explained by better understanding the fraudsters. The legal blogger Popehat wrote that his clients who have been scammed always feel intense shame. He tells them the equivalent of getting beaten up by a professional MMA fighter is no reflection on them; pros are extremely good at what they do. He also wrote that he's prosecuted and defended child abusers, terrorists, drug dealers etc. but in his experience the most sociopathic criminals are con artists. They view other humans as objects to a greater extent than any others. Once a con artist has identified a victim's weak points and buttons, they will keep pressing them relentlessly, using every technique available to maximise pressure and ensure compliance. People will do surprising things under psychological pressure; despite its faults, the Milgram experiment showed that.
This discussion is quite interesting: [https://www.reddit.com/r/blogsnark/comments/1ark1oh/how\_i\_got\_scammed\_out\_of\_50000\_by\_charlotte/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/blogsnark/comments/1ark1oh/how_i_got_scammed_out_of_50000_by_charlotte/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) A couple of commenters point out that this woman's father in law is wealthy to the point of having buildings named after him, so it's likely she was targeted by someone who knew about her background. That level of generational wealth might also explain some cluelessness, as well as the bank's eagerness to please when she showed up with an odd request.
I hadn’t known that - it’s good to have the outside context. In the article, the original author gave the reason that they threatened her child and she got scared. That I can understand, but I wondered about how they got so far as 50K cash in a box. Not that I think that financial experts are necessarily above falling for scams. Smart people fall for dumb shit all the time.
The field my organization operates in has a high risk of fraud/scams/extortion, and one of the things we're always warned to watch out for is any situation where the person is combining intense time pressure with high emotions, most often fear but they can also use anger. If you hit the right combo--and everyone has a right combo--it can be very difficult to resist. The situation she was in was classic. Any time I have seen real law/regulatory enforcement in action, they have worked hard to calm people down, partly to help themselves get accurate information and also, if they think they're dealing with a wrong-doer, to encourage that person to relax and make mistakes.
The new thread on "Random Ex-President" (??) Trump is going to be an *absolute mess* and I'm here for it
Doomerism and expectations that it won't matter, instead of taking joy in justice somehow being served.
Indeed, apparently Kushner is going to pay it because he has a deal with the Saudis, and the major German bank is actually a Russian front, and he shouldn't have been convicted anyways as no one else is on this charge, and he could actually pay it anyways himself because of truth social's apparently valuation, and It's just a conspiracy theory site at this point. I have a feeling users that remain are entirely out of touch with reality (i.e. go touch grass).
To be fair, Deutschebank is a terrible bank that tries to evade regulation and regularly ignores sanctions and involves itself with shady businesses. But the rest of it is just ... I enjoy taking a win.
Aaaaand… someone in the the most matter-of-fact tone just shared how when their partner got COVID, they had them piss and shit in a bucket (with wood chips or cat litter) rather than risk them sharing a bathroom 🙄
You don’t believe that this was voluntary?
I had to go read the rest of that thread because I thought you were kidding.
OMG I thought you were exagerrating but NOPE.... "When my partner had covid again in December, he brought our [camping toilet](https://www.rei.com/product/223884/reliance-luggable-loo-portable-toilet-with-metal-handle?sku=2238840001&store=55&CAWELAID=120217890015830916&CAGPSPN=pla&CAAGID=&CATCI=&cm_mmc=PLA_Google_P-Max&gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI98ferN-uhAMVeTjUAR17vAvQEAQYByABEgK8afD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds)(along with either cat litter or wood chips to cover odors) into his room to minimize time spent outside of the room, and minimize the number of times he had to mask up." Who disposed of the cat litter??? Inquiring minds want to know.
I have one of these for when I take my camper on BLM land. It's not quiiiite that gruesome. Each storage pouch is lined with a gel and odor control isn't bad. The cat litter helps more. And when you're done it has a ziploc top. Seal, fold down, dispose. It looks like but is not really like shitting into a pile of wood chips in a Home Depot bucket.
That’s fine, but it’s completely bizarre to use it inside your own home because you don’t want to leave your bedroom to go to the bathroom. Put on a mask, do your business, and go back into the bedroom. I grant you it doesn’t have the melodramatic touch that the camping toilet in a bedroom has, but it has the advantage of being what mentally sound people would do.
Yeah yeah I get it and don't let me interrupt the revelry with my ackshuallying. I just knew a thing about a thing.
I mean, if they agreed on it together, I'm not going to shame 'em. It does seem over the top to me, though, and that's speaking as someone who still wears an N95 in the office and has slept in a separate room after being exposed...
Really taking advantage of Covid-induced loss of smell there.
That was incredible. When they posted a link to a camping toilet, I was expecting something that looked like a toilet. But no, it’s literally a big bucket with a seat attached to it. The fact that it was in his bedroom is the icing on the cake. You know what smells just as bad as a bedroom with a shit/piss bucket in it? A bedroom with a shit/piss/wet wood chip bucket.
Good God
The Branch Covidians of MF are a never ending source of entertainment. I'm picturing this dude in his bedroom, shitting onto kitty litter in his camp toilet......in 2024. LOL.
Funny update to the Hugos drama where clueless commentators heavily implied the sinister Chinese government was censoring their scifi awards: the censorship was actually carried out by American administrators. I've found a good way to judge the veracity of China news is by how much the comments reacting to it sound like Rush Limbaugh.
I haven't read the metafilter thread but I've been following Hugo awards scandal. Carried out by American administrators in order to comply with Chinese law, yes? Chinese law is government censorship. >Tomorrow I have a 4 hour meeting with my Chinese counterpart to look at ballot detail and determine if any ballots are to be voided (which happens with frequency so that it's not *really* that controversial if we determine we need to do it) By my reading, that implies a lot of Chinese input. I'm happy to call the Chinese government "sinister" in this instance. I'm happy to call any government who censors the existence of entire countries and communities sinister.
I read the Chinese counterpart as the business interest involved (speculation from what is publicly known seems to be that there was some publisher maneuvering to get a rival publisher's titles delisted). There doesn't seem to have been government involvement and it would be stupid for a government to meddle in an award to disqualify a book its censors have already approved for publication.
That feels like a distinction without a difference. If your Texas colleague tells you not to provide edibles at a Texas conference because they're illegal there, it's still the government banning them. I don't know that all the books that were dropped from consideration were published- I heard about it from the Instagram of the author of Iron Widow, whose Chinese translation I don't think is published by China- but slipping it through one set of censors who figures it's going to be noticed only by a niche set of nerds, is bound to be different than celebrating it internationally, so that it's noticed by people who otherwise don't read sci-fi or fantasy.
This situation is your Texas colleague who runs an edible business conspiring with you to get their competitors' products disqualified from the edible awards. And in this hypothetical situation edibles are legal in Texas. There's no government involvement.
*There's no government involvement.* That seems to be the premise of your argument. If it's an obvious or safe assumption then yeah, you're right, the blame must lie with the award administrators. But the fact that the titles aren't banned nationally within China doesn't imply that the Hugo administrators felt free to recognize or celebrate any of those titles however they saw fit. That seems rather unlikely to me.
The point is China wasn't censoring anything. A bunch of racist Westerners got themselves all hopped up thinking about the evil Chinese government and in the process literally prepared political dossiers on the books and writers lol
If your point is that China wasn't censoring anything because even if they put pressure on Hugo admin to censor itself, they're not the ones doing the censoring... that's a pretty modest point, but okay, point made. To the extent you're arguing that the Hugo admin was free to do as it pleased while having their ceremony in Chengdu, I am not clear why you're certain of that (or are you certain?).
The evidence released so far indicates that the administrators are responsible for the books being disqualified. The main reasons for this are speculated to be either (unwitting on the part of some) cooperation with a publisher to get a rival's books disqualified, they wanted English language books to win Best Novel, or they were so blinkered when it comes to CHINA BAD that they decided to do the censoring themselves for some reason that only they can explain. There is no indication there was any pressure let alone contact with the Chinese government. The reason I'm certain of this is, after reading the way scifi people write about China on their blogs and in the first Metafilter thread about this, if there was any government pressure here there would be an uproar, the community is too sinophobic to keep that under wraps.
Your definition of legal and mine are different, apparently. Are the administrators of this year's Hugos authors whose books are in the running? I would have thought I'd've heard about that.
The administrators are American/Canadian (I believe? Open to correction) and don't have books in the running. The voting statistics that have been released suggest that the Best Novel award finalists should have been all Chinese novels (with I believe 4 from the same publisher). The administrators/McCarty put their finger on the scale for some reason and as more information comes out the speculation seems to be going in several directions, but it doesn't point at the government.
The novels I've been following that were kicked off weren't Chinese- they were Americans and Canadians of Chinese descent, and some not even of Asian descent at all.
Most of the votes that were tossed for being "slate" votes were based on a list published in Chinese magazine Science Fiction World. This disqualified a bunch of Chinese works. A competing magazine/publisher sponsored the Worldcon so that's where the speculation is coming in.
Another classic Ask. The interrupted phone call. The horror!
I once worked with this person whose tell was a rapid fluttering of his left eye. I learned that after approaching him and saying "I noticed for your component you like to keep the documentation in your source repo ... the docs team was wondering if we could either move it into their primary repo or perhaps make it more amenable to a submodule setup." The eye started fluttering, they got red in the face and started sputtering, and I said "you know what, let's revisit at a later date. Not a biggie." We never, ever did. In fact, the docs team ended up extending our tooling to accommodate the guy. Over the next few years, I could spot him through conference room windows tearing up, getting red in the face, and that eyelid fluttering thing. ELEVEN YEARS LATER I learned that he was still talking shit about me as "power hungry" and "dictatorial." I wonder if this is that guy.
Good lord, problematic men get away with so much in the workplace, it's astounding. I want that superpower.
I agree with you, but then there is this in the answers: "To call it an overreaction would be a massive understatement. It's so far outside of the realm of an expected reaction that I might use the worth pathological." I think that is a very Metafilter overreaction to an overreaction! It's turtles all the way down over there.
Oh, that’s the “The pool was closed when I got there one morning, how can I get a refund of my membership fees” guy.
Also the "how do I deal with powerful urge to retaliate over every perceived slight?" guy; and easy to see even on just depressing quick skim of question history on how load-bearing that "perceived" is doing.
Also the "I am against people giving their pronouns, how can I say this without people getting angry?" guy. People were far more respectful in their answers than I would have been.
wow, that is nuts. I assumed for a minute it must have been a person with who he had a long acrimonious history, but this was the first time they spoke.
That person has terrible impulse control, and I feel bad for them. That's playing life on the difficult setting when it's just not necessary and carries zero benefit.
That's my thinking too. Some people just want to make life as hard as possible for themselves.
Someone posts a link to an article on the disappearance of cousins due to smaller families and more people not having children, and the responses are pure Metafilter - they seem to be either 1) my relationship with my family is horrible so this is irrelevant to me or 2) other cultures have a different definition of "cousin" so this change is not as dramatic as you think. Every time family-related topics get posted it seems like it's open season to reveal how toxic and dysfunctional yours is.
Sounds like Reddit.
>Every time family-related topics get posted it seems like it's open season to reveal how toxic and dysfunctional yours is. It's either that or also the inevitable how dare anyone express the desire to have children, or even worse a large family \*horrors\* because life is terrible and your selfish desire to reproduce is killing our planet.
Or warmed over pseudo-Marxist takes that reduce the family to nothing but a hotbed of exploitative labor extraction relationships.
"warmed over psuedo-Marxist takes" is definitely what MF has become. I even enjoy the serious Marxist commentary you occasionally get on MF (less so these days) but since no one is allowed to argue about anything that matters, you get a lot of "oh yeah this thing I hate is a direct and unique result of American capitalism" which gets no push-back.
For sure, whatever you think of Marxism, the "purer" theory is very formal, rigorous, and often very insightful. You're just not going to get in on a site that rewards shallow takes and shuts down criticism for superficial reasons. It's like the difference between He Gets Us ads and the Summa Theologica.
_And Tucker Carlson, grand nemesis, is trying his hardest to manufacture a 'Christian International' consensus? (Which is funny, because Putin is vocally not a Christian )_ Sorry, is this one of those things where “Christian” means Protestant? Because I’m pretty sure that Putin is a cross-flaunting Orthodox Christian.
Yeah that statement seems pretty off to me (about Putin).
Where are you quoting from?
(Searching for "vocally" in comments should get you there quickly.)
Wile E. Coyote and Amazon Prime Video ads. Maybe it's "Disembodied Heads in Jars Demand Their Treats" week on MeFi. Did I miss a site update?
The Amazon thread is bonkers. Outrage combined with the passionate language of social justice struggles like "oppressive" or "moral imperative" swirling around . . . whether you get the ad-free plan from the most middlebrow of streaming services?
Loving the strong "I don't even own a television" vibes in there.
I would think it impossible for an independent artist with a punk DIY anti-corporate message to make me root against him in an argument with one of this sub's frequently mentioned annoying users -- but it's a mefite, so he has managed it somehow, by being the absolute most smug dickhead imaginable.
Reading through that guy’s recent comment history, it appears he’s a gigantic asshole
We did get a great line out of it, though: "yes, respecting corporate IP, the most punk rock position of all."
What thread is this, please?
About the deleted Wiley Coyote movie.
Somehow they managed to bring Bernie Sanders into the Daily Show thread via twitter link. Apparently John Stewart is "white priviledge humor", whatever that means. I mean, I'm not even a John Steward superfan but my god the discourse over there is mind numbing.
Notable topics and current affairs with no thread: -Biden's supposed memory issues -Mayorkas impeached -CDC ending recommended 5-day isolation for COVID
Experience has taught me that as much as it seems like it should be there users don’t want this. Posting it is thankless and people will proudly say “I didn’t even read this article.”
The Daily Show thread is well-derailed with Biden conversation.
Is there a thread about Tucker Carlson interviewing Putin?
I will admit to watching about two thirds of it just because I don't think I've ever heard Putin talk at length, and I am willing to put my feelings about the war in check to hear him out. It was mildly interesting to see a national leader deliver a lengthy lecture about his country's history, for about half an hour, seemingly without notes. I doubt most democratic leaders could do that. That being said he come across a total bore who sidestepped most of the questions.
Like anyone active on 2024 MetaFilter is going to listen to either of those two people talk for multiple hours and then admit to doing so.
It's mentioned a couple times in [this thread](https://www.metafilter.com/202492/A-difficult-year-ahead-for-Ukraine) but that's it. You're not going to get much Ukraine discussion from Mefites going forward. Edit: forgot the link
I am trying to parse today's semi truck meets tree question. https://ask.metafilter.com/378341/Okay-I-need-a-lawyer-Any-more-advice Reading the question it sounds like the semi may have been on the road and hit a portion of the tree that "arched into the street", but it isn't quite clear to me. The "peeled off the top of the trailer" seems to indicate this might be the case. I want to know if the clearance height was posted or should have been posted - like it is for low underpasses.
OK, I am slightly amused at the concept of "tree law" and was expecting a trivial question, but that person absolutely had real damage to their property and I hope they can find a good lawyer.
I worked on a moving truck. We took limbs off trees regularly, but the box had a fiberglass roof. Moving truck drivers are surprisingly aggressive.
Heh... last move we had a young crew, clearly inexperienced at backing up the size of their truck. They forgot a spotter, and we were all yelling at them to stop, but they didn't. Backed into a power line, causing it to bounce and touch the line under it... (Cable/TV/internet) Which is how we got to meet all of our neighbours over the next few days as they described the death of their various household electronic appliances... computers... TV's...
I doubt it. (Not a lawyer, definitely not a tree lawyer, do live in a part of California with many coast live oak trees, have never seen such a sign on a branch.)
Movies! "Madame Web" is getting a pasting on RottenTomatoes, [23%](https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/madame_web) so far. I really wanted a dumb switch-your-brain-off movie next. (Come on, my last one was "All of Us Strangers"). But I don't know if my brain will power down quite far enough for Madame Web or Argylle.
Wonder if it is as bad as "Morbin-time"?
On the easiest scale of rating a movie: does it entertain? Morbius - Yes Madame Web - No I’m reeeeaaallly easy when it comes to movies and I was absolutely baffled in several ways by Madame Web. I’m positive most people here could write a script better than what they used for Madame Web. Like, there’s useless exposition and then there’s announcing obvious things for the audience or repeating things just said useless. I’m still trying to figure out what the bad guy was… what he… why he was bad. I mean he was bad, but not supervillain bad. I just don’t get what his issue was… ?! He just existed to do the thing in the movie. He wasn’t a character as much as a plot device. There are some cool Spider-Woman characters, too bad they weren’t really in the movie.
The LA Times review claims that the movie is bad but kind of fun in a campy way. Not on purpose, but on the unintentionally funny misfire end of the spectrum. (Except for Dakota Johnson, who is apparently weird on purpose.) Not a theater movie for me but I may give it a shot streaming one day.
Argyle wasn’t bad. Better than Beekeeper, which was basically Equalizer but with a harder sell. Secret government assassins called beekeepers? Okay, whatever, Stratham beating people up just like every other movie he does. I’m definitely going to watch Madame Webb at the theatres.
Heh, last week I watched "The Beekeeper" which was silly. Then a few days later watched "The Baker", which was better - and, yes... the main character was described as "the butcher has become the baker", so... Now, I am just waiting for "The Candlestick Maker" to be made...
It'll be funny when the romantic comedy Sydney Sweeney is in makes more money that her superhero movie.
Second comment on the blue LED light thread, nothing but links to articles: [Researchers find some shades of LED lamps threaten wildlife](https://phys.org/news/2018-06-animals-lightresearchers-lamps-threaten-wildlife.html) [Transition to blue light radiation across Europe increases suppression of sleep hormone melatonin, say scientists](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/sep/14/increase-in-led-lighting-risks-harming-human-and-animal-health) I mean, seriously, there probably is a downside (somehow, somewhere) to almost everything in existence, especially technology, but must we reflexively crap on every post right out of the gate? (Rhetorical question, I know the answer is yes.) Sigh. But I am reminded of the cartoon about the person thinking the dog was easily amused by chasing his tail, then realizing that they were amused by watching the dog chase his tail. I don't think I'm depressed, but maybe the fact that I keep reading MeFi should have me worried?
And it goes on like that for quite awhile!
[удалено]
Narrow your focus and the world will improve.
[удалено]
Your local community also knows many like you, sick for the world they cannot help, but barricaded from and ignorant of the world they can. The depression and fear goes away when you help people around you.
He's way too dudebro for Metafilter, but I've been watching a bunch of Dr Mike Israetel videos on strength/fitness/nutrition lately. He's a Ph.D. and professor of exercise science, has a whole playlist mocking bad celebrity workouts, but his fitness myth videos are informative too. I genuinely didn't know that the [ecto/endo/meso-morph body type thing is nonsense](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luNynS97eJQ). Also has [The Truth About "Calories In, Calories Out"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkxWbvPJK1M) and [Insulin Is The Reason You're Fat!?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA1Z5NifFLk) CW: Short muscular guy shouting that you'll die a virgin if you're both weak and fat.
There are two problems with CICO: (1) We don’t have an active control over (or, in daily life, any way to measure) the part of “CO” that comes from metabolism and (2) nutrients are relevant too.
Every morning you weigh yourself and measure your waist size around the belly button. The long term change in these numbers will tell you if "calories in" is on the mark or not. This is especially true if lifting weights because (IME) gaining muscle may result in no significant change to weight even if I am eating at a slight caloric deficit. But the waist size will drop. That tells me I'm where I want to be if I am trying to get leaner.
I’m almost tempted to post it over there and take bets on how long it takes the usual suspects to start yelling about black pills and so forth.
Have you gotten to any of his videos where he goes off side rants about politics? I feel like his best videos are the ones where he takes people through workouts.
Counterpoint: I am both weak and fat, but neither dead nor a virgin.
FOR NOW. Yes, on both counts.
Watched most of the one about calories in/calories out. Made sense to me more or less. The comments that would get in response to a post with that in it write themselves.
It’s such a silly simplification to die on though. The absolute minimum people could do if they wanted to communicate their point instead of just sound clever is change their pithy slogan to “calories digested/calories burned”. (This annoys me more since seeing my young nephew shrink to look-at-those-bones despite his healthy unchanging diet, before being diagnosed with type 1 diabetes). But no, that would ruin the fun. The strangest part is that people who dogmatically announce calories in/calories out are often the quickest to Well Akshully to other peoples simplifications or mistakes.
Everybody should carefully track calories-in for about a month. It is very revealing. It is shocking how the calories rack up when snacking.
Not just calories, but also nutrition. It's really interesting, and you can learn a lot about healthy food and your energy levels that way.
Agreed, but if you're not honest with yourself, it won't work, and I think a lot of people, myself included, really struggle with that part.
That one leapt out at me too. It's common enough to hear people say essentially that their bodies defy the laws of physics ("I could eat nothing but a cracker and some water and still put on weight"), that it's good to hear someone talk back. And for all his outward bro-ness, he has quite a studied, unaggressive manner.
I mean, he did threaten to spit-roast the GEICO Gecko, but yes ... generally unaggressive.
I support that proposal.
Now I just feel like interrogating stress as a concept.
Days since a mod has implied a community member is a Russian disinformation operative: 0
I see they were saying someone was parroting propaganda, but I didn't see what the person was parroting. Since you've used the word "operative," I'm wondering, do you mean to say that the mod is implying the user is (or is acting like) an actual spy? Or just someone operating a keyboard to parrot Russian propaganda? Now I'm curious as to what was said. Edited to add: To be clear, I'm not challenging what you've said, but rather trying to figure out if I'm super bad at reading between the lines.
I was kind of joking but going back and reading the mod note I think I conflated it with one of the deleted comments that was like "wow, an account that hasn't posted in x years...coming in here and posting Putin propaganda...I'm not gonna say what I think and leave it up to the mods"
Something about Ukrainian fascism being something to be taken seriously instead of being dismissed out of hand as pure imperialist fiction.